Climate Engineering Liability and Reliability: An Integrated Treatment (CELARIT)

鉴于气候工程(CE)的潜在灾难性副作用，国际责任制度的存在通常被认为是其被国际接受部署的先决条件。然而，出现了两个基本问题：第一，作为分配和分担可能损害的风险的手段的责任制度是否可取和可行；第二，如何处理这样一个事实，即对CE的气候影响的估计只能依靠数值气候模型，而不是经验数据。虽然行政长官损害赔偿责任的问题最近引起了越来越多的关注，但这些问题还没有在文献中得到全面的解决。此外，如何能够就行政长官实施的影响的相互竞争的模式的稳健性和可靠性作出判决，特别是当这些模式可能在法庭程序中作为证据时，尚未得到答复。在此背景下，CELARIT的核心目标是发展对国际责任问题以及模式可靠性和稳健性问题的综合处理。这项研究将建立在三大支柱的基础上：(1)气候模型、经济学、哲学和法学的主要学科研究成果；(2)在中欧气候研究期间，这些观点的跨学科整合的成果；(3)气候和CE研究及其组成学科的最新发展。这些支柱共同支持该项目的特定目标，并为其提供信息，即跨学科地解决在行政首长责任范围内使用模型作为证据的问题。因此，本项目开展的工作将：(1)解决法院如何评估和比较相互竞争的模型，以及增加稳健性和可靠性的代价；(2)评估在什么情况下气候模型可被视为在CE责任审判中提供了可接受的和充分的证据；(3)研究如何在无法观察到计算损害的反事实的背景下(一个没有CE的世界，也许没有气候变化)确定损害。最后(4)，通过分析模型如何在可靠性有限的情况下仍可用于指导行政长官相关行动，以及科学政策建议如何充分处理不确定性和无知，将在更广泛的背景下审视这一问题。该项目使中欧国际工商学院的参与者重新团结在一起。然而，CELARIT在CEIBARL的基础上迈出了重要的一步，因为它进行了方法学上的重新定位，以跨学科的综合治疗：它包括对模型不确定性提供的限制和潜力的系统调查，以对社会负责的方式管理CE的实施。

In light of the potentially catastrophic side-effects of Climate Engineering (CE), the existence of an international liability regime is generally considered to be a prerequisite for its internationally accepted deployment. However, two fundamental questions arise: First, whether a liability regime as a means of allocating and sharing the risks of likely damages is desirable and feasible; and secondly, how to deal with the fact that estimates of the climate effects of CE could only rely on numerical climate modeling, but not on experiential data. Although the topic of liability for CE-induced damages has recently attracted increasing attention, these questions have not yet been addressed in a comprehensive manner in literature. Also, it has not yet been answered how it is possible to arrive at judgments on robustness and reliability of competing models of the impacts of CE implementation, in particular when these may serve as evidence in court proceedings. Against this background, the core objective of CELARIT is the development of an integrated treatment of international liability issues and problems of model reliability and robustness. This treatment will build on three pillars: (1) the outputs of the predominantly disciplinary research in climate modelling, economics, philosophy, and law carried out under the precursor project CEIBRAL; (2) the outputs of the interdisciplinary integration of these perspectives during CEIBRAL; and (3) the most recent developments in the state of the art in climate and CE research and in the constituent disciplines. Jointly, these pillars support and inform the particular objective of the project, namely to tackle, across disciplines, the problem of using models as evidence in the context of liability for CE. The work conduced in this project will thus: (1) address the question how competing models can be assessed and compared by a court, and at what cost additional robustness and reliability come; (2) assess under what conditions a climate model may be considered as providing admissible and sufficient evidence in a CE liability trial; (3) examine how to determine damage in a setting where the counterfactual for computing harm (a world without CE and, perhaps, without climate change) cannot be observed, but is itself a product of a numerical model. Finally (4), the problem will be looked at within a broader context by analyzing how models can be used for guiding CE-related action in spite of their limited reliability, and how scientific policy advice can adequately deal with uncertainty and ignorance. The project reunites the participants of CEIBRAL. However, CELARIT takes an important step above and beyond CEIBRAL in that it undertakes a methodological reorientation towards an integrated treatment across disciplines: It includes a systematic investigation of the limitations and potentials that model uncertainty offers for governing CE implementation in a societally responsible fashion.